文档介绍： LAWRENCE A. BOLAND
1 The neoclassical maximization
hypothesis
At present the maximization postulate has an unusually strong hold on
the mind set of economists... Suffice it to say that in my view the
belief in favor of maximization does not depend on strong evidence
that people are in fact maximizers... The main argument against the
maximization postulate is an empirical one – namely, people
frequently do not maximize. Of course, this standpoint argues that
while postulates simplify reality, we are not free to choose
counterfactual postulates. Hence, from this point of view a superior
postulate would be one under which maximizing behavior is a special
case, but non-maximization is modated for as a frequent mode
of behavior.
Harvey Leibenstein [1979, pp. 493–4]
If by rational we mean demonstrably optimal, it follows that conduct
in order to be rational must be relevantly fully informed.
e Shackle [1972, p. 125]
The assumption of maximization may also place a heavy (often
unbearable) computational burden on the decision maker.
Herbert Simon [1987, p. 267]
The assumption of maximization is a salient feature of every neoclassical
explanation. Obviously, then, if one wanted to criticize neoclassical
economics it would seem that the most direct way would be to criticize the
assumption of universal maximization. Several approaches have been
taken. Harvey Leibenstein [1979] offered an external criticism. He argued
for a ‘micro-micro theory’ on the grounds that profit maximization is not
necessarily the objective of the actual decision-makers in a firm and that a
complete explanation would require an explanation of intrafirm behaviour.
He also gave arguments for why maximization of anything may not be
realistic or is at best a special case. Similarly, Herbert Simon has argued
that individuals do not actually maximize anything – they ‘satisfice’– and
12 Principles of economics LAWRENCE A. BOLAND The neoclassic